| Papers [1-15] of 100 :: [Page 1 of 7] | | Go to page : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 —> | Search results on "BUSH IRAQ": |
|
|
Bush, Iraq and Weapons of Mass Destruction, 2008.
Looks at the entrance of President Bush into the Iraq War based on the possible existence of weapons of mass destruction.
1,700 words (approx. 6.8 pages), 7 sources, MLA, $ 55.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper argues that the allegation that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, which were never discovered, was a deliberate deception by the Bush administration to justify their aggression in terms of containing terrorism by maintaining the international balance of power. The paper further asserts that Bush ignored the truth that he heard from his advisers and deliberately misled the American people to make an excuse to go to war with Iraq. The paper contends that Bush wanted to secure America's position of dominance, power and access to oil resources in the Middle East and tricked the American people into thinking that going to war with Iraq was a way of waging war on terrorism.
From the Paper
"The primary thrust of Bush's argument for the invasion of Iraq was that Iraq was a serious threat to the rest of the world because it was building WMD. This is an interesting allegation, given that the only country that really has a large supply of WMD is the USA. However, it must be borne in mind that those countries who seek to justify owning WMD - such as the USA - seek to do so in terms of deterrence theory. The idea is that if rational countries such as the USA and Russia possess nuclear weapons, their mutual knowledge that the other country has WMD will deter either country from ever deploying the WMD."
| |
|
The Bush Doctrine and Iraq, 2008.
This paper contends that the Bush Administration misled Congress and the American people in order to launch a preemptive war against Iraq.
2,137 words (approx. 8.5 pages), 8 sources, APA, $ 66.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The paper discusses the Bush doctrine of preemptive war and its manifestation in the Iraq War. The paper provides evidence that the Bush Administration provided fraudulent justifications and employed a mass media disinformation campaign in order to gain support for the war in Iraq. The paper highlights the failure of this invasion and emphasizes that this was aggression disguised as self defense.
From the Paper
"Analyzing the Bush doctrine as it relates to the war in Iraq requires examining the covert motivations of the Bush Administration while applying a credibility test to the "evidence" it offered to justify military intervention in Iraq. As Pitt and Ritter (2002) warned, once this "evidence" is dissected and compared to actual conditions in Iraq before the invasion, it is clear that Bush Administration "evidence" was systematically exaggerated, contrived, and concocted, and then peddled through the mass media to build a fraudulent case for war against Iraq."
| |
|
A Tissue of Falsehoods: The Bush Administration and Iraq, 2004.
Evaluates President Bush's reasons for going to war with Iraq.
675 words (approx. 2.7 pages), 8 sources, MLA, $ 23.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
In this paper, the claims made by the Bush Administration to justify war with Iraq are evaluated. The paper finds that the evidence does not support the claims, which are found to be either lies or self-deception and concludes that the war was not justified.
| |
|
Bush and Iraq, 2004.
An analysis of the Bush administration's reasoning behind the war in Iraq.
1,264 words (approx. 5.1 pages), 4 sources, MLA, $ 42.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper contends that neither terrorism nor the desire for democracy was at the root of the American invasion of Iraq. The paper attempts to illustrate why America invaded Iraq, claiming that there are no easy answers. The paper presents some opinions that propose that the war is connected to the vast, multi-trillion dollar oil reserves. Other views suggest that perhaps the war is a way to win popularity for a president who has built his presidency around war abroad. Others suggest more radical theories, such as religious crusading or the attempted fulfillment of prophecies.
From the Paper
"According to the original reasoning behind Bush's war on Iraq, Saddam Hussein's regime posed a terrorist threat to the free world, however (subsequent to evidence emerging in the press that this threat was exaggerated, if not fabricated) in more recent statements the Bush administration has strongly implied that the war was justified not on the basis of freeing the world of terrorists but because Hussein was a brutal dictator and Iraq needed to be freed from his rule. The idea that the war on terror is actually a war to bring democracy to the world is one which may coincide somewhat with the controversial ideas espoused by Fukuyama, who taught that History (which is to say the evolution of society, not the happening of events) would end when all nations were converted to western liberal democracies and engaged in the global consumerist culture. "
| |
|
Bush and Iraq, 2007.
A paper strongly arguing against the American presence in Iraq.
809 words (approx. 3.2 pages), 1 source, APA, $ 28.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper strongly argues that the Iraq War is wrong and that the American people have been misled into supporting it. The author cites Senator Robert Byrd and his anti-Iraq policy as supporting the paper's thesis. The author gives his own opinions why President Bush was so adamant regarding Saddam's capture and overthrow.
From the Paper
"I have said from the beginning of the war that we seem to have forgotten about Bin Laden and simply focused on Saddam. I believe that Bush used the events of 9-11 to gain public support to go after Bin Laden when in fact he really wanted to use our military to go after Saddam for taking a hit out on Bush's dad in the early 90's.
"The Administration assured the U.S. public and the world, over and over again, that an attack was necessary to protect our people and the world from terrorism. It assiduously worked to alarm the public and blur the faces of Saddam Hussein and Osama Bin Laden until they virtually became one(Byrd, 2003)." "
| |
|
Bush's War on Iraq, the Second Time Around, 2002.
Discussion of the misguided objective of the Gulf War under the first President Bush.
1,150 words (approx. 4.6 pages), 3 sources, $ 44.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
It is the purpose of this paper to demonstrate that President Bush should have pressed on to remove Hussein from power and to establish a democratic state in Iraq.
| |
|
Bush's Speech on the Iraq War, 1992.
A critiques of the President's January 16, 1991 address to the nation announcing the start of war.
1,350 words (approx. 5.4 pages), 10 sources, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
From the Paper
"This study will provide a critique of President George Bush's January 16, 1991, televised address to the people of the United States announcing the commencement of the war against Iraq.
The speech was given after five months of sanctions against Iraq after that country invaded Kuwait due to what Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein saw as Kuwait's intransigence in talks over a long-lasting border dispute. Bush in his speech tries to give the impression that his attitude toward Iraq and Hussein had been clear and steady, but in fact U.S. policy toward that nation and its leader had been confused and confusing, and analysts such as Woodward argue that that confusion helped Hussein come to the conclusion to invade Kuwait in the first place. As Woodward writes, "U.S. policy toward Iraq was muddled. Bush..."
| |
|
Bush?s Invasion of Iraq, 2005.
This paper argues in support of Bush's invasion of Iraq.
975 words (approx. 3.9 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 34.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper explains that the suspected development of WMDs by Iraq was not the only reason for attacking Iraq; the most compelling reason was the appalling human rights record of Saddam Hussein, the most cruel, evil tyrant on the surface of the earth, who killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people who opposed him. The author points out that, in the post-9/11 scenario, it was imperative for the terrorists, rogue regimes, such as of Saddam and other enemies of the United States, to realize that the world's only super power was no "paper tiger". The paper relates that Iraq, after being freed from the clutches of dictatorship, is now confidently embarking on the road to democracy despite formidable hurdles.
From the Paper
"Now let us look at the other positives that have followed the US invasion of Iraq. Unlike the predictions of most critics, who had expected a long drawn out battle with heavy casualties at the start of the war, the Saddam regime was toppled in three weeks with minimum casualties and with most of the country's infrastructure intact, including its oil fields. This achievement by the US forces was an improvement even over the Gulf War I, generally considered to be "very successful," in which the retreating Iraqi army had set many Kuwaiti oil wells on fire triggering an environmental disaster."
| |
|
President Bush?s War on Iraq, 2002.
An overview of America's imminent war on Iraq, illustrating the varying opinions on the necessity of this war.
1,786 words (approx. 7.1 pages), 9 sources, MLA, $ 57.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper analyzes President Bush's desire to launch a preemptive strike on Iraq. The paper discusses President Bush's belief that the United States should launch a preemptive strike on Iraq, rather than wait for sanctions by the United Nations. The paper outlines the support he has received from some political groups while facing opposition from others. Each side's valid arguments, on why they believe the U.S. should or should not go to war with Iraq, are presented.
From the Paper
"In 1990, the United Nations imposed sanctions on Iraq after it invaded Kuwait. The invasion eventually lead to the Gulf War in 1991.The U. N. agreed to lift the sanctions if Iraq would allow international inspectors to certify it had removed its weapons. However, since 1998, Baghdad has refused to allow inspectors into the country until the sanctions are lifted, claiming the weapons no longer exist (Yacoub, 2002). In May 2002, a new Security Council resolution dealing with U. N. sanctions was accepted by Iraq for a period of 6 months. Iraq was unhappy with the oil-for-food deal stating ?these new measures exposed America?s tendency toward harming Iraq (Yacoub, 2002).? The Arab League felt Iraq made a positive step toward having the sanctions lifted."
| |
|
Invasion in Iraq, 2006.
A critique of President George W. Bush's war in Iraq.
1,420 words (approx. 5.7 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 47.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper studies and criticizes the Bush administration's current war in Iraq. The paper begins with the author's assertion that the only reason President Bush invaded Iraq was to secure U.S. interests in the region -- namely oil. The paper provides a review of literature, citing authors and opinion-makers who likewise oppose the war, to support the paper's thesis. Then the paper provides an analysis of several claims made by the administration to bolster its war, all of which this author refutes. The claims are: (1) that Iraq had a stockpile of weapons of mass destruction, (2) that Iraq had nuclear weapons, (3) that Iraq had active chemical and biological weapons and imminent plans to use them, and (4) that Iraq had mobile weapons laboratories.
Introduction
Review of Literature
The Case of Weapons of Mass Destruction
The Case of Iraqi Nuclear Weapons
The Case of Active Chemical and Biological Weapons Plans
The Case of Mobile Weapons Laboratories
Conclusion
From the Paper
"The entire Bush administration had been playing the mantra that Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. David Cortright, Alistair Millar and Linda M. Gerber (2003) write, " In his January 2003 State of the Union address President Bush referred to tens of thousands of liters of anthrax and botulinum toxin and hundreds of tons of sarin, mustard gas, and VX nerve agent. U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell asserted in his February presentation to the UN Security Council that Iraq was concealing efforts to redevelop weapons of mass destruction." These observations had been in contradiction with the UN investigators as they had inspected Iraq on more than 700 occasions. The UN investigators had found nothing that would support the claims being made by the Bush and Blair Administration. "Dr. Hans Blix, head of the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) told the Security Council on 14 February, 'So far, UNMOVIC has not found any [proscribed] weapons, only a small number of empty chemical munitions. . . .' (David Cortright, Alistair Millar and Linda M. Gerber, 2003)"
| |
|
"Gandhi" and Iraq, 2004.
An analysis of Richard Attenborough's film, "Gandhi", which includes a comparison of the Indian leader's policies and George Bush's attitude towards Iraq.
1,487 words (approx. 5.9 pages), 3 sources, MLA, $ 49.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses and analyzes the film, "Gandhi", directed by Richard Attenborough. Specifically, it compares and contrasts the British "imperial power" in India and the United States' preemptive war in Iraq, citing the motives behind each conflict. In addition, it includes the main political arguments for the British policies in India and the Bush administration's policies in Iraq. Nonviolent reform is the best course of action in the world, and war should never be an option for "solving" the world's problems.
From the Paper
"Mahatma Gandhi is probably the world's best known advocate of peaceful protest. Gandhi's actions in India and throughout the world show that superior power can be worn down by non-violent means. Gandhi, born on October 2, 1869 in Porbandor, India, was educated as a lawyer in Great Britain, and knew little of India's problems before he returned to his homeland from South Africa in 1914. His parents were wealthy Hindus, and he gained much of his early feelings about life, peace, and the world from his mother, who strongly influenced him. It was from his first experiences in South Africa that his thoughts and ideals on passive resistance were born. Thrown off a train for being "colored" in a remote town on his way to Pretoria, his first instinct was to leave. A Gandhi biographer writes, "His sensitivity prevailed upon him, eventually, and as the dawn streaked the cold hills, Gandhi's mind had been made up: he headed toward Pretoria. As Louis Fischer pithily puts it, 'the germ of social protest was born'" (Puri 8). Thus, Gandhi quickly learned about prejudice and hatred in South Africa, and he created his lifelong philosophy of peaceful resistance to tyrants and bigots, too."
| |
|
Terrorism - It Takes Two to Tango, 2002.
An argumentative paper about the double standards of President Bush's stance against Iraq and his war on terror.
2,254 words (approx. 9.0 pages), 5 sources, MLA, $ 69.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper presents a detailed examination of one aspect of terrorism. The writer explores the validity of President Bush threatening to use nuclear warfare against other nations. The writer argues that it is not right to threaten the same thing that the US is forcing Iraq to allow inspections to rule out.
From the Paper
"The war on terrorism has been in existence since shortly after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center on 9-11-2001. When the towers came down, America watched in shock and the rage that followed was a roaring, volcanic hot anger from deep in the heart of the nation. The president stood before the country and promised to hunt down those who were responsible and bring them to justice. Americans cried with pride, saluted him from their seats at home and watched the Senate give him more than a dozen standing ovations for his commitment to fight back. While the public supported his efforts the president went to various nations with top secret proof of the involvement of Osma Bin Ladin. Shortly thereafter the war on terrorism began. Since then it has been a slow path, but it is a successful path. There have been members of Al Qeda captured and questioned and the groups have been broken up. The US residents have been put on alert so many times it is becoming routine as the FBI and the CIA continue to uncover plans of additional future attacks. "
| |
|
The Iraq War, 2005.
Examines justification and critical arguments about George W. Bush's reasons for invading Iraq.
1,577 words (approx. 6.3 pages), 9 sources, MLA, $ 51.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
The great majority of critical comment from both scholars and other countries suggest that the United States attacked Iraq precipitously and without exploring all other options first. In addition, there is now credible evidence that the reasons given by Bush and his administration to justify this action do not stand up to close scrutiny. This paper examines the arguments pertaining to President Bush's invasion of Iraq and ultimately argues that the war was not justified.
Paper Outline:
Introduction
Justification
Critics
Skepticism in Other Countries
Conclusion
Bibliography
From the Paper
"While the United Nations had an intensive program of inspection of Iraq's war manufacturing, Iraq employed multiple strategies to thwart UN inspections (Cordesman, p. 175). The need for these inspections was clear, because Iraq had used WMD not only on civilian targets during the Iran-Iraq and Gulf wars but on minority groups within its own borders (Cordesman, p. 176). The Bush administration believed, largely because of Iraq's intense efforts to thwart the U.N.'s authority to inspect, that Iraq might have hidden some WMD outside its borders (Kassop, Nancy)."
| |
|
The U.S. Media and the War in Iraq, 2006.
An analysis of the role the US media played in the war with Iraq.
1,800 words (approx. 7.2 pages), 5 sources, $ 71.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper discusses how since September 11, 2001, it has been painfully evident that the U.S. news media has been much more interested in promoting the Bush Administration than in being objective reporters of the news. Their abandonment of journalistic standards and integrity has had serious consequences, ranging from the disastrous war in Iraq to massive and systematic violations of our Constitution and our laws by the Bush Administration. The paper further discusses how despite overwhelmingly supportive media coverage, the Bush Administration's Iraq policies have been clearly based upon hype instead of facts. Before the war, many Americans and much of the international community suspected the Bush Administration of ulterior motives in Iraq and the Middle East.
From the Paper
| |
|
The War in Iraq, 2006.
A historical and political analysis of the war in Iraq.
2,700 words (approx. 10.8 pages), 10 sources, $ 106.95
»
Click here to show/hide summary
Abstract
This paper reviews how the history of the war in Iraq demonstrates that controversy is inevitable when a government plots to unleash an unjustified preemptive war against a sovereign state, accuses it of being part of a terrorist axis of evil, defies the will of the international community by attacking that sovereign state on the pretext that its weapons of mass destruction are a threat to peace and international stability and then no weapons of mass destruction are found. The paper further discusses how the Bush Administration's Iraq policies have been mired in controversy from the very beginning, for many Americans and much of the international community suspected the Bush Administration of ulterior motives.
From the Paper
|
|
|
